\documentclass[12pt]{article} 
\begin{document} 

\begin{center}
{\bf Grain Growth and the Puzzle of its Stagnation in Thin Films:\\
A Detailed Comparison of Experiments and Simulations}

\vspace{.10in}

Katayun Barmak\\
katayun@andrew.cmu.edu

\vspace{.10in} 

Scott Roberts\\
sr2e@cmu.edu

\vspace{.10in}

Anthony Rollett\\
rollett@andrew.cmu.edu

\vspace{.10in}

Terry Shyu\\
tshyu@andrew.cmu.edu

\vspace{.10in}

Materials Research Science and Engineering Center and the Department of
Materials Science and Engineering\\
Carnegie Mellon University\\
Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA\\


\vspace{.10in}

David Kinderlehrer\\
davidk@andrew.cmu.edu 

\vspace{.10in}

Shlomo Ta'asan\\
shlomo@andrew.cmu.edu 

\vspace{.10in}

Richard Sharp\\
rwsharp@cmu.edu 


\vspace{.10in} 



Materials Research Science and Engineering Center and the Department of
Mathematical Sciences\\
Carnegie Mellon University\\
Pittsburgh 15213, USA

\vspace{.15in}

Eva Eggeling \\
Fraunhofer Austria Research GmbH, 8010 Graz, Austria\\
eva.eggeling@fraunhofer.at

\vspace{.15in}



Kevin Coffey\\
krcoffey@mail.ucf.edu

\vspace{.10in}

Tik Sun\\
ti857626@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu

\vspace{.10in}

Bo Yao \\
bo555252@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu

\vspace{.10in}

Advanced Materials Processing and Analysis Center\\
University of Central Florida\\
Orlando, FL 32816, USA
\end{center} 

\vspace{.15in}



\noindent {\bf Abstract}:  We revisit grain growth and the puzzle of its
stagnation in thin metallic films. We bring together a large body of
experimental data that includes the size of more than 30,000 grains obtained
from 23 thin film samples of Al and Cu with thicknesses in the range of 25 to
158 nm. In addition to grain size, a broad range of other metrics such as the
number of sides and the average side class of nearest neighbors is used to
compare the experimental results with the results of two dimensional
simulations of grain growth with isotropic boundary energy. In order to
identify the underlying cause of the differences between these simulations and
experiments, five factors are examined. These are (i) surface energy and
elastic strain energy reduction, (ii) anisotropy of grain boundary energy, and
retarding and pinning forces such as (iii) solute drag, (iv) grain boundary
grooving and (v) triple junction drag. No single factor provides an
explanation for the observed experimental behavior.

\end{document}
